David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to see this Bill being brought forward and join the Minister in acknowledging the work the Oireachtas joint committee put into this issue. I am a big fan of the pre-legislative scrutiny process and note that it happened in this instance on the double, which is great. It is great to see such work being done, given the fact that members of the public and interested bodies can have an input into legislation before it is drafted and published in order that changes can be identified and made at a time when they can be made far more easily.

The Bill is not before time. I recently received a complaint from a constituent who had parked her vehicle in Cork city on a very wet evening. She did not see any sign indicating that clamping was in operation in the area or that a parking ticket was required. After she had done her shopping, she came back a little while later to find her car had been clamped. It took the company an hour and a half to come and unclamp her car at a cost of €165. It is, therefore, welcome that the Minister is restricting the charges that may be levied.

I suggest we take account of the length of time it takes to have a car unclamped. If somebody has to wait an enormous length of time, it is extraordinarily inconvenient, as he or she has to get on with his or her life. He or she may have appointments to attend and other things to do. The woman in question was picking up her daughter and they had to wait in the rain until the people in question came to unclamp the car. If a company cannot unclamp a car within a reasonable length of time, say, 30 minutes, fees should be waived. This should be a condition of policy.

The two previous speakers mentioned parking in town centres as opposed to parking in out-of-town centres. If there are major restrictions and penalties in connection with parking in town centres, town centres will die. This is happening all over the country. If clamping is added, it will further disincentivise people from shopping in town centres. The Minister has a responsibility to ensure there are adequate parking spaces in towns because being able to park is a commercial imperative.

Many businesses in our towns need places where people can park in order to do their shopping. The principle behind parking charges in towns is to encourage a turnover in the use of parking spaces, whereby people would have to move their cars after a certain period so that others can take their place. Business owners are the main offenders in this regard. They often leave their cars parked outside their business premises all day long, only to wonder why customers are not coming to them. We have to encourage business owners and their staff to avoid parking in the vicinity of main streets so that customers can park in these areas. That is common sense.

Clamping should be a last resort except in the case of people parking in disabled spaces. I suggest that the Minister should consider mandatory clamping for cars parked in disabled spaces without permits. It is the only approach that might prevent people from parking in designated disabled spaces. All of us have observed individuals pulling into such spaces, thereby denying it to somebody who needs the space because he or she is wheelchair bound or has another disability. Fines do not appear to work in these situations. The penalties for parking in disabled spaces are not strict enough but clamping would end this problem for once and for all. There is no excuse for an able bodied person parking in such spaces, except laziness. It is inconsiderate and downright mean behaviour.

The Minister referred to apartment complexes. Many of the apartment developments constructed in the recent past failed to provide adequate car parking space. The planning regulations were changed several years ago to allow for high density developments. I have encountered cases in which neighbours fell out with each other over the lack of car parking space in apartment complexes and housing estates. We need to ensure housing developments provide adequate car parking.

Does the legislation make provision for emergency vehicles, including doctors' cars, so that they are not clamped? If a GP parks his or her car on the street and rushes into a premises to deal with an emergency, is there a prospect that he or she will come out to find that the car has been clamped? There have been instances in the past where this has happened. I suggest that if a car displays a doctor's sign it should not be clamped.

The NTA and other agencies responsible for implementing this legislation should treat clamping as a last resort. If people park in dangerous places, their vehicles should be moved but if clamping becomes the norm it will be very inconvenient for everybody. There is also an inconvenience in purchasing parking tickets. Deputy Lawlor spoke about the use of barriers, which are a good idea. We might encourage shopping centres to make use of barriers so that people can park in underground carparks or designated spaces without having to worry about rushing back to put money in the meter. We need to find a balance between out-of-town shopping centre car parks and on-street parking. People will go where it is easiest to park. I have heard stories of people parking as close as they can to the door of the gym to avoid having to walk any distance. There appears to be a mentality whereby walking is regarded as an inconvenience. Perhaps we should encourage people to park a bit further away in order to take exercise. I have been trying to park a couple of hundred yards away from my intended destination so that I can take a stroll.

This is a timely Bill. I am curious about the decision not to require licensing of places where clamping might occur. We need to keep an eye on this. Locations where clamping can occur should be designated. However, if this goes overboard and clamping becomes a money making racket we may need to consider introducing a licensing regime for clamping. The Minister decided not to proceed in that direction because he regarded it as too expensive. What is the expense in sending a map and a letter to the NTA and asking it to say "Yes" or "No"? It should not be very expensive to get permission from the NTA to introduce clamping in a particular public area. If we go down the route of having local authorities make the decision on clamping, this has to be based on safety concerns and considered very carefully as a last resort. I commend the Bill to the House.

See this speech in context